Sure bud whatever helps you cope.

“white collar” or “clean” bigotry is still bigotry. Someone doesn’t need to shout slurs at every possible moment to spread hate and attack people’s identitie s or rights to exist.

Bigotry does not need to be tolerated full stop. It doesn’t matter how much someone dresses it up to appear palatable or how much someone claims they’re “just asking questions/just want a respectful debate” when the topic is someone’s immutable identity and right to medical treatment.

I don’t really feel compelled to engage with such a bad-faith argument but i’ll humor you a bit.

In all my research I couldn’t find a single study, anywhere, demonstrating an objective quality of life improvement. These would be measurable metrics like: * Life expectance. ** * suicide rate.** * …

They ask subjects how they feel about suicide. This is an effective proxy for, “are you happy with the major medical procedure you just asked for?” Unsurprisingly, this is subject to enormous bias. Instead I found evidence that *not* transitioning is a much better, much more effective treatment for children.

Followed by 2 links that… don’t talk about suicidal ideation but instead about no longer feeling dysphoric.

And then the poster goes on to claim that somehow this reduces suicidal ideation in children who may be trans. This entire section does nothing to address the fact that reaffirming a trans child’s gender does, in fact reduce suicidal ideation in trans children. Obviously If a child isn’t trans, they won’t feel suicidal if they’re not allowed to transition.

Just because a thought is well worded and lengthy, does not mean it’s worth listening to.

I don’t really feel like explaining what bad-faith arguments are to someone who’s clearly concern trolling so I’ll just leave it at that.

misrepresent data

Yep that’s definitely what I said.

You couldn’t have cherry-picked a more inflammatory comment to defend. Truly such a shame that people who misrepresent data for the sake of their anti-trans stances have their obvious rage-bait posts removed.

OW2 came with some genuinely good gameplay changes (depending on who you ask. The topic of 5v5 is contentious at best.) that made the game feel legitimately fresh. Could it have been a “2.0” patch/expansion instead of being presented as a sequel? Probably. But skins are optional as always because the real meat of the game was the gameplay since the start.

The blog post doesn’t actually make it that clear if they’re charging to play the PvE (optimistic I know).

Permanent access to the Overwatch 2: Invasion Story Missions

But given it’s Overwatch, the bad press has already started and will no doubt spread like wildfire. They only have themselves to blame so w/e.

PvE wasn’t canceled, what was cancelled was unique talent trees for each hero and whatever “hero missions” was. What we’re getting is (what appears to be) episodic story content with scripted events and cinematics.

I don’t think anything is inherently wrong with blockchain technology, but what it’s been molded into (a purely speculative profit driven ecosystem ) is a waste of it’s potential.

Tbh it does kinda look like that, but they haven’t explicitly said so. Though they look more fleshed out with cinematics and more scripted events compared to Junkenstein.

Definitely Outer Wilds as well.

Hell, looking into the soundtrack changed my daily playlist to something heavily Midwest Emo.

Youtube link

Youtube link

Nah that was the misconstrued message. From the start they said that the Talent trees and “hero missions”(unknown what this is) were being scrapped but PvE Story missions were still releasing.

The crypto side of web3 definitely felt way more “consumerist minded” with the way wallets were able to connect to multiple websites(exchanges) in order to “buy” things(alt/shitcoins). But federated social media feels like a much better use of decentralization so far.